[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 06:39:25PM +0000, Jorge Llambias wrote:
> la and cusku di'e
> >1a. meaning of so'V
>
> {so'a} and {so'e} are clearly relative to {ro}, unless
> the keywords ("almost all", "most") are totally meaningless.
> It seems to me that they are necessarily less than ro, and
> also at least ro/2.
As was being discussed on the wiki, this sort of way of looking at
things has issues for infinite sets. ro/2 can be ro in those cases.
I'd suggest viewing so'a and so'e as iterators along with ro. So,
while ro executes your propositional function for every x, so'a and
so'e execute for every x, but it should evaluate true for only every
N x's, and false for the rest. (This is because, as xorxes was
saying, so'[ae] should imply naku ro; if it only evaluated for every
N x's instead, it wouldn't be an exact number claim).
I'm not sure if this approach can adapt to ce'i without forcing it
to claim that there are at least 100 values for x.
I dunno about so'[iou].
[...]
> >3. CAhA, da'i, mu'ei etc.
>
> ka'e = su'omu'ei
> ca'a = <this>mu'ei
> nu'o = ka'e jenai ca'a
> pu'i = ?
not {ka'e je ca'a}?
Or perhaps nu'o as {pu naje ba ka'e} and pu'i as {pu je ba ka'e}?
--
Jordan DeLong - fracture@hidden.email
lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u
sei la mark. tuen. cusku
Attachment:
binaEE293wMyV.bin
Description: application/ygp-stripped